Share to Facebook Share to Twitter Bookmark and Share
File #: RES 19-1401    Version: 1 Name: Ballot Question Language
Type: Resolution Status: Passed
In control: City Council
Final action: 8/23/2019
Title: Directing the City Clerk notify the County Auditor to place a referendum of Ordinance ORD 18-39 on the November 5, 2019 ballot and approving the title and language for that ballot question.
Sponsors: Jane L. Prince
Attachments: 1. Baucom email
Title
Directing the City Clerk notify the County Auditor to place a referendum of Ordinance ORD 18-39 on the November 5, 2019 ballot and approving the title and language for that ballot question.

Body
WHEREAS, the City of Saint Paul enacted Ordinance ORD 18-39 which created Chapter 220 of the Saint Paul Legislative Code; and

WHEREAS, Chapter 200 established rules for residents related Coordinated Trash Collection; and

WHEREAS, Saint Paul City Charter § 8.05 provides that an ordinance passed by the City Council may be subject to referendum by a petition filed within forty-five (45) days after its publication; and

WHEREAS, residents timely filed a petition seeking a referendum to repeal Ordinance ORD 18-39; and

WHEREAS, the City Council found that the petition was sufficient to satisfy the minimum signature requirements under the City Charter; and

WHEREAS, the City Council found that the subject matter of the petition was preempted by Minnesota Statutes and was an unconstitutional interference with the Contract between the City and the Consortium and directed the City Clerk not to submit Ordinance 18-39 as a ballot question; and

WHEREAS, petitioners filed a court challenge to the City Council’s determination not to place Ordinance ORD 18-39 on the ballot (Court Case No. 62-CV-19-857); and

WHEREAS, on May 30, 2019, Ramsey County District Court Judge Leonardo Castro ordered that Saint Paul place Ordinance ORD 18-39 on the November 5, 2019 ballot; and

WHEREAS, the City petitioned the Minnesota Supreme Court to review Judge Castro’s Order and the Minnesota Supreme Court agreed to hear the appeal (Court Case No. A19-0916); and

WHEREAS, the Minnesota Supreme Court issued a decision on the appeal on August 22, 2019; and

WHEREAS, the Minnesota Supreme Court upheld Judge Castro’s Order to place Ordinance ORD 18-39 on the ballot; and

WHEREAS, Minnesota Statutes § 205.16 requires that the City Clerk provide to the County Auditor written notice of a ballot ques...

Click here for full text
Date NameDistrictOpinionCommentAction
8/24/2019 4:23 AMUnhappy Resident #28,655 For Thank you council member Prince for sponsoring this bitter pill. +1
8/23/2019 9:56 PMJacob  Against (Abridged)I don't seem to fall neatly on one side or the other of the "Trash Wars". I'm not a fan of the way it was enacted but not opposed to the idea of "city run" waste management. I care that it's not holistic for waste and resource reduction. I care it's not adaptable to the needs of many. I propose a renegotiation to better fulfill the goals of "city run" collection. Because I don't want to see 10-15 garbage/recycling trucks trundle by my house everyday again. For noise, street wear and tear and other pollution. 1ST: I want to see an opt out added for 0 and low wasters. That doesn't mean getting another hauler. 2ND: Size and number bins PER PLOT should be up to owners. 3RD: A rewards system for haulers losing or gaining market share dependent on customer satisfaction +/- 5-15% a year. 4TH: A system to adjust bin size if conically overfull. 5th: More public garbage's (near bus stops) that haulers p/u not city. 6TH: The billing, accountability and responsibility need to be clear. +4 -1
8/23/2019 9:04 PM    I'm hoping it won't help, and at this point there is little you, as a city council, could do to repair the damage you have done, but admitting your mistake and stopping the threats now would allow all of you at least a small bit of dignity on your way out the door in November. +3
8/23/2019 8:26 PMAbu Nayeem Candidate for Ward 1   I would like to ask the city council and the mayor; "why are you snubbing the people’s right for a referendum at every given moment?" Every step you take to silence community members voice, the greater distrust of governance is seeded within. Furthermore, you should apologize, in advance, to your staff for potentially wasting their time and effort in preparing the trash proposal. Please be sensible on the language. Thank you. +4
8/23/2019 5:42 PMKErickson Against Please revise to allow HOA's that have sole responsibility for rubbish to opt out. In our complex, some units are attached by 6, some are attached by 4. Those with 4 units attached have to comply, those with 6 do not. We have homeowners that need to pay and then ask for reimbursement from HOA and the charges are double! It is an administrative nightmare! Some homeowners can throw different garbage out, some can't. It's a PRIVATE ROAD nd the City does not maintain it. There is also ONE EXTRA garbage truck driving on our private drive once a week; total three per week versus the two previously. The Council DID NOT completely research all variables beforehand and this is what makes homeowners upset. Thoughtless and if there are not major revisions to allow these types of situations opt out, I will be advocating to the neighborhood to say NO at the ballot to both the Ordinance and your seat! You've already wasted how much on the lawsuit that you ultimately lost! +4
8/23/2019 5:22 PMWard 7 For Please do not punish taxpayers for ramming this ordinance through last year. A valid petition was provided that was ignored by the city council. Elections have consequences. +6 -2
8/23/2019 3:08 PMCandidateSharonAndersonWard2   Strict Scrunity on Wording Summary of Councils Bad Faith in a Patterned Enterprise also at http://taxthemax.blogspot.com
8/23/2019 3:06 PMChris Cloutier   I am not sure what I am being asked to support or not support here. But, I hope the Council understands that St Paul is a Home Rule City and while they may support organized collection (as do I) the bigger issue is how the citizens of St Paul get to participate in the decision-making process for the City. Creating a confusing, poorly worded referendum will engender bad feeling, deepen the conviction that the Council and Mayor don't listen and probably help the "No Organized Collection Crowd". Keep the wording simple, plain and understandable. +5
8/22/2019 10:45 PM    How about an apology for this whole fiasco: ignoring citizens' concerns in July 2017 before the final contract negotiations, approving a poorly designed program, doing nothing when all the complaints began surfacing in May 2018 before service began, denying a citizen petition, and appealing the district court's decision to the MN Supreme Court? You are supposed to represent us, not the haulers. +10 -1
8/22/2019 7:36 PM    Please don't make this mistake any worse than you have already. Make the wording on the ballot understandable for all. +10 -1
8/22/2019 6:48 PMDavid Thom For Ward 7   “whether to direct”? The Minnesota supreme court has ordered the referendum be placed on the November 5 ballot. It would appear to me that the city Council does not have a choice in this matter anymore. The current city council and mayor have cost the citizens of Saint Paul millions of dollars with their boondoggles. The language of the question put on the ballot should be plain and simple so that the citizens of Saint Paul understand the question with no confusion. The entire city council and mayor should be ashamed of themselves for denying the citizens their rights. You all need to be voted out of office in the next election. Signed David Thom for Saint Paul City Council Ward 7. +9
8/22/2019 5:22 PMEric Lein   FOR - the ballot referendum on garbage ORD 18-39. /// AGAINST - confusing or convoluted language designed to "trick" voters (Keep It Simple). As I write this, proposed ballot text has not been disclosed. /// WHAT'S MISSING - Court rulings in favor of the People's right to vote also means that (per St. Paul's City Charter) ORD 18-39 should have been suspended by the Council on 11/14/2018. /// WHAT'S NEXT - Issue refunds to trash "customers" for improperly-charged trash fees for the period beginning 11/15/2018 through 11/05/2019 [regardless of whether voters decide to accept or reject ORD 18-39]. +8
8/21/2019 5:48 PMBruce Clark Against "Justice Delayed is Justice Denied"- Gladstone Watch how this plays out: By scheduling a Supreme Court hearing so close to the critical Aug. 23rd deadline for printing the Fall election ballot, is "someone" counting on the City of St. Paul "taking a knee, and running out the clock"? Evidence? The Council will schedule a special hearing to consider a referendum question at 4:30 on Friday the 23rd. Oh, wait! That's the exact time that the Ramsey County Elections office closes! Hmmm.... +8